Dennis Hackethal
@dennis.hackethal·Joined Jun 2024·Ideas
Founder Veritula.
Author. Software engineer. Ex Apple. Translator of The Beginning of Infinity.
dennishackethal.com
#5055·Anon Anon, 3 months agoThis is not a valid or interesting criticism of my argument that the apparent dilemma can be resolved through the growth of knowledge.
Not interesting:
You’ve merely argued one side of the dilemma, apparently insisting that there is no dilemma to be resolved. If the dilemma can be resolved, then any argument for one side or the other is pedantic and superseded by that solution.Not valid:
Sex is neither necessary nor sufficient to cause pregnancy. “Eating too much” is also neither necessary nor sufficient to cause adiposity. Even if you assume that those voluntary actions played a causal role in the transformation, the argument you presented depends on the premise that “if someone voluntarily performs any action that contributes to the antecedents of a transformation and has knowledge about the antecedent relationship between those actions and that transformation, then that transformation is under their authority.” This is a deeply problematic theory, because it results in every accident or crime against someone happening “under their authority.” With respect to sex and pregnancy, specifically, this theory leads to the conclusion that miscarriages are also under one’s authority. Regardless of whether your real concern here is about the loss of life due to terminated pregnancies (vs. punishing women for having sex), far more potential lives are lost due to miscarriage than abortion, so this should be of much greater concern.Fortunately, miscarriages could also be avoided by using the technologies I proposed above. In the future, this could even become the preferred method of gestation for the protection of the child’s life, and the optimization of their early development.
Please work on your tone. You’re mixing in personal accusations rather than just sticking with impersonal arguments. For example: “apparently insisting”, “pedantic”, and also a hidden accusation that I have an ulterior motive to punish women rather than save lives (“Regardless of whether your real concern here…”).
This kind of tone can derail and sabotage debate. Veritula has a policy against any behavior that sabotages debate. Please review our forum rules (#4460).
New accounts, especially anonymous ones, need to tread lightly and prove they’re worth engaging with.
#5055·Anon Anon, 3 months agoThis is not a valid or interesting criticism of my argument that the apparent dilemma can be resolved through the growth of knowledge.
Not interesting:
You’ve merely argued one side of the dilemma, apparently insisting that there is no dilemma to be resolved. If the dilemma can be resolved, then any argument for one side or the other is pedantic and superseded by that solution.Not valid:
Sex is neither necessary nor sufficient to cause pregnancy. “Eating too much” is also neither necessary nor sufficient to cause adiposity. Even if you assume that those voluntary actions played a causal role in the transformation, the argument you presented depends on the premise that “if someone voluntarily performs any action that contributes to the antecedents of a transformation and has knowledge about the antecedent relationship between those actions and that transformation, then that transformation is under their authority.” This is a deeply problematic theory, because it results in every accident or crime against someone happening “under their authority.” With respect to sex and pregnancy, specifically, this theory leads to the conclusion that miscarriages are also under one’s authority. Regardless of whether your real concern here is about the loss of life due to terminated pregnancies (vs. punishing women for having sex), far more potential lives are lost due to miscarriage than abortion, so this should be of much greater concern.Fortunately, miscarriages could also be avoided by using the technologies I proposed above. In the future, this could even become the preferred method of gestation for the protection of the child’s life, and the optimization of their early development.
This is not a valid or interesting criticism of my argument that the apparent dilemma can be resolved through the growth of knowledge.
It wasn’t intended as a criticism. It was a related observation. That’s why I didn’t mark my idea as a criticism. It sounds like you’ve misunderstood me.
#5056·Erik Orrje, 3 months agoThis sounds true but does it add anything new to saying that "AGI is an attempt to program Darwins theory of evolution"? 🤔
Please remember to mark your ideas as criticisms whenever appropriate. Although this idea is phrased as a question, it’s still a pending criticism as long as it doesn’t get answered.
#5046·Anon Anon, 3 months agoAbortion is a technology problem, not a political issue. The choice between the loss of life and the loss of authority over one’s own body is a poor one. This dilemma is caused by a lack of medical knowledge.
At a high level, there are only two technologies needed to resolve this dilemma.
1. Safe extraction of a living pregnancy.
2. In Vitro Gestation.In fact, if some of the political funding had been redirected toward research, it would probably be solved by now.
It seems odd to me when people argue pregnancy is a loss of authority over one’s body.
A woman had sex. Assuming it was voluntary, what did she think was going to happen?
Imagine someone saying: ‘I ate too much. Now I’m fat. I’ve lost authority over my own body.’ But they didn’t. They got exactly what they should have expected.
I think what those people are really saying is: they don’t like that their actions have consequences. They want to have their cake and eat it, too.
#5042·Erik Orrje, 3 months agoIn biological evolution, the landscape itself never changes directly. It only happens as a consequence of evolving genes.
Guess: The same is true in the "landscape" of the mind: Individual ideas mutate and evolve in relation to problems, and that's what constitutes the landscape.
That sounds right but how is it a criticism of my idea? It’s the ideas the mind evolves that change the landscape, no?
Another way to approach AGI? (Very early, preliminary thoughts.)
Say you write an evolutionary algorithm, like the ones that have been written before. Then DD would argue it’ll get stuck because all it can do is explore a given landscape for its best features. Whereas real evolution creates new landscapes.
To address this issue, you subject your algorithm itself to variation and selection, by wrapping it in another evolutionary algorithm. But this approach just kicks the can down the road because now it’s the space of programs that’s limited.
How do you break out of this limitation?
You can’t just keep wrapping your programs in evolutionary algorithms like that because that only keeps kicking the can down the road. It’s like adding more and more entries to a multiplication table. It’s not the same as a multiplication algorithm. But for evolution, the problem is harder, in a way, because not even recursion solves the issue, and the starting point wasn’t as ‘flat’ as a multiplication table. The starting point is already an algorithm, not just a list.
What’s needed, in DD’s lingo, is a jump to universality. But a jump to what kind of universality, exactly?
cc @tyler-mills
#5038·Tyler MillsOP revised 3 months agoA quale can be recorded and replayed later, arbitrarily many times. That looping program is not a person: it can only create whatever knowledge it originally did, not any possible knowledge, maybe until freed from the loop. Yet it still constitutes experience.
So people are not the only programs that can be qualia.
A quale can be recorded and replayed later, arbitrarily many times.
How do you know this?
Some people are lactose intolerant.
Some people are lactose intolerant, others are vegan.
Replace dead link
I’m pro abortion but I have some pro life in me.
Banning the abortion of a zygote seems ridiculous. So does aborting a seven-month-old fetus.
Why not go with: you can abort until the nervous system develops.
Clearly, an embryo without a nervous system can’t be sentient and thus can’t be a person, right? And as long as it’s not a person, it doesn’t have any rights.
According to https://www.neurosciencefoundation.org/post/brain-development-in-fetus, “an embryo’s brain and nervous system begin to develop at around the 6-week mark.” And: “At as early as 8 weeks (about 2 months), you can see physical evidence of the brain working (the electric impulses) as ultrasounds show the embryo moving.”
This idea is for viable pregnancies only. Other considerations may apply for non-viable ones.
I’m pro abortion but I have some pro life in me.
Banning the abortion of a zygote seems ridiculous. So does aborting a seven-month-old fetus.
Why not go with: you can abort until the nervous system develops.
Clearly, an embryo without a nervous system can’t be sentient and thus can’t be a person, right? And as long as it’s not a person, it doesn’t have any rights.
According to https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK542179/, “CNS [central-nervous-system] development begins during the 3rd week of embryogenesis…”
This idea is for viable pregnancies only. Other considerations may apply for non-viable ones.
#299·Dennis HackethalOP revised about 2 years agoI’m pro abortion but I have some pro life in me.
Banning the abortion of a zygote seems ridiculous. So does aborting a seven-month-old fetus.
Why not go with: you can abort until the nervous system develops.
Clearly, an embryo without a nervous system can’t be sentient and thus can’t be a person, right? And as long as it’s not a person, it doesn’t have any rights.
According to https://www.neurosciencefoundation.org/post/brain-development-in-fetus, “an embryo’s brain and nervous system begin to develop at around the 6-week mark.” And: “At as early as 8 weeks (about 2 months), you can see physical evidence of the brain working (the electric impulses) as ultrasounds show the embryo moving.”
This idea is for viable pregnancies only. Other considerations may apply for non-viable ones.
Link is dead.
#5017·Dirk Meulenbelt, 3 months agoLess constant feeding can improve blood sugar swings and insulin sensitivity because every time you eat, your body has to run the insulin system again.
You can just eat fiber with your meals instead, that will slow down insulin secretion afaik.
#5021·Dirk Meulenbelt, 3 months agoI tried to look for good arguments against eating dairy for it being dairy and I cannot find any.
Some people are lactose intolerant.
One is that it's a way of reducing body fat, and overweight is likely a bigger problem for many people than potential short term negatives of fasting.
One is that it's a way of reducing body fat, and overweight is likely a bigger problem for many people than potential short term negatives of fasting.
#5015·Dirk Meulenbelt, 3 months agoOne is that it's a way of reducing body fat, and overweight is likely a bigger problem for many people than potential short term negatives of fasting.
When a question is a criticisms, you want to mark your answer as a criticism too so it counts as answered.
Yes. Very easy to overconsume, especially from hyper-palatable foods which are often greasy. I try to eat around 60g of fat per day.
Yes. Fat is calorically dense and easy to overconsume, especially from hyper-palatable foods which are often greasy. I try to eat around 60g of fat per day.
Yes. Very easy to overconsume, especially from hyper-palatable foods which are often greasy. I try to eat around 60g of fat per day.
I could see that. Milk is hydrating. Yogurt is a good source of calcium. Can go with low-fat or fat-free options to reduce calories.
I could see that. Milk is hydrating. Yogurt is a good source of calcium and protein. Can go with low-fat or fat-free options to reduce calories.
I could see that. Milk is hydrating. Yogurt is a good source of calcium. Can go with low-fat or fat-free options to reduce calories.
#4995·Dirk Meulenbelt, 3 months agoProtein above 0.8 g/kg body weight is desirable, often up to around 2 g/kg.
Per kg of lean mass. Someone who weighs 150kgs does NOT need to eat 300g of protein.
#4990·Dirk Meulenbelt revised 3 months agoWhole grains, nuts, and legumes are health-promoting staples.
Nuts in moderation. Very calorically dense, easy to overeat.
#4974·Tyler Mills, 4 months agoI've been thinking about the principle that principles should not or do not admit of exceptions, else they are not principles. Yet, I've thought, we seem to not abide by this, even with something as fundamental as freedom of speech. We make exceptions for calls to violence, doxing, etc.
But I've (somehow only) just realized that those are not what we might call "standalone exceptions" -- they are overlaps with other principles, those of non-initiation of force and privacy, in this case.
So we can say: principles do not admit of exceptions, but if there is more than one principle in the system, one's exception can be another's enforcement. Which is not an inconsistency. Then the question is, which one is the higher priority? Maybe this is where the court system comes in. (I don't know much about politics).
One answer could be that the more fundamental principle wins.
#4977·Tyler Mills, 4 months agoAre pacifism, socialism and compromise all short-termist?
Pacifism reduces casualties --- in the short term.
Socialism reduces poverty --- in the short term.
Compromise reduces disappointment --- in the short term.
I think you may be giving these stances too much credit.
There’s something to be said about people who have a high time preference also often being pacifists or socialists. But that may have more to do with the constellation of ideas in that particular memeplex than logical sense.
For example, compromise increases disappointment right away since nobody involved gets what they want, and they realize this immediately when the compromise is made.
Freedom of Association Maxxing:
https://libertythroughreason.com/freedom-of-association-maxxing/
Welcome to Veritula, Brad.
Feel free to chime in on one of the existing discussions to get started: https://veritula.com/discussions
We also have a Telegram channel you’re welcome to join. I can send an invite.
What brings you to V? What are your main interests?